tv CNN Newsroom CNN December 4, 2012 8:00am-9:00am PST
salad stuff. booker is wonderful to do this. keep the conversation going. facebook.com/carolcnn. thanks for your comments and thanks for joining me today. i'm carol costello. cnn "newsroom" continues right now with ashleigh banfield. thanks so much, carol. it is 11:00 on the he's coast. it's 8:00 on the west coast and it looks like a drone. iran says it's a drone. it may well be a drone, but the united states navy says it's not one of our drones. iran's revolutionary guard says it has captured one of our prized pieces of intelligence, something called a scan eagle. iran says it was brought down by anti-aircraft squads in iranian air space. there's no visible damage in the pictures that aired today on iranian tv, and, again, the u.s. navy, which patrols the persian gulf constantly, says all ever its drones are currently accounted for. it also says its drones stay in international air space. joining me now with his insights
and expertise is jim walsh. jim, first and foremost, look, it may very well be someone else's drone. i'll get to that in a moment. but when we say we only patrol in international air space, do we really only patrol in international air space? >> well, the first thing to know about that ashleigh, is international air space is highly contested. different countries draw the maps in different ways. and so you can be in a spot in the air where one country claims it's in international air space and another country claims it's in their national air space. it's sort of a fudge word, and we've had this before. this is not the first time we've had this dispute. we've had drone incidents now with iran on this makes the third different occasion, and in every case there are claims by both sides, and it's rather tough to resolve. >> just about every aspect of this is classified, so how much faith should i put in this claim by our navy that we've got all our drones, it's not ours?
>> yeah, you know, that seems like a pretty narrow claim. it's not the u.s. government saying we have no drones. it's the navy. so all that means is that the navy wasn't involved potentially. there are other countries that have u.s. drones. there are other agencies within the u.s. government that use drones. so i think that's a fairly narrow denial, and, listen, i don't buy a lot of what i hear and read on iranian -- in the iranian state media. some of it is pretty crazy stuff. on the other hand, it's perfectly plausible this has happened. it's happened at least twice before. in october iran tried to shoot down a drone. they captured a cia drone about a year ago. one of the lessons here, one of the things the viewers should conclude from this is iran is the most watched country in the world. the u.s. has satellite intelligence, drone intelligence, human intelligence. israel, saudi arabia, russia, everyone watches iran, and that's an important conclusion to keep in mind. >> so, jim, if it isn't, in fact, our drone and our story is
the truth, it's clearly a mystery to us as well whos, who might be flying drones out there? >> pretty etch everyone at this point is flying drones. iran has a lot of countries that don't like it in the region. then there are israel obviously has drones and, in fact, you may have noticed that in a previous reporting over the last several months iran is starting to fly drones into israel and certainly israel probably flies drones into iran. so there are multiple countries with multiple interests who are all watching iran. it could be any one of them but my guess is, yes, there is a drone. it was captured. the source of it we won't know, but the bottom line is iran is being watched by all the major players in the region. >> and just one quick question before i want to switch gears with you about the drone and that is that you mentioned it was about a year ago that iran captured a drone. by our estimation it's a year today, if you can believe it, a year ago exactly today that they captured that other drone of
ours, and there was much ado about the kind of technology that iran was getting its hands on, and i recall the president asking they politely if mahmoud ahmadinejad would actually sent it back. i think he sent a toy version of it back as a joke. aside from the comedy, what about the technology? if this is someone else's drone, if it has any of our components, how dangerous is this to us in terms of their new jersey and what they can gather about us? >> yeah. i think you put your finger on an absolutely critical question. to me this story means two things. one is iran is being watched, it's going to be hard for it to get away with anything because it's being watched. but number two, the separate issue of drones. you know, it's great when the u.s. can keep a monopoly on drones. when we are the only ones who have drones and no one else has them but a world is changing. other countries have drones. now iran has drones that it has flown into israel. other countries will develop them. we'll soon enter a world in which we no longer have this monopoly and we're going to have to start to deal with these
problems. i think we have to think long-term about drones because do we really want a world in which every country good and bad has drones and is flying missions all over each other's air space? i think that could get pretty messy pretty quick. there's some longer term fundamental questions about the evolution of drone technology and how that's going to be managed. this kind of story is going to continue as we go forward. >> i want to switch gears into syria and maybe drones will make its way into our conversation at this point because this grave concern that syria has now been -- well, the intelligence suggests it's been mixing some of the chemical weapons and that they may be moving some of them as well and this has really kicked our government into high gear about sending over dire warnings to bashar al assad about any move to use chemical weapons on his people as a red line for this country. first of all, what is happening with our intelligence gathering machine now that we have that one bit of information that at least we know in terms of keeping an even closer watch on what's happening?
>> well, my guess is that's the number one intel focus right now for the u.s. government is not so much the battle between rebels and asat but the fate of those chemical weapons. i think this story that they're starting to mix weapons, potentially put sarin gas in bombs, is the big story. it's bigger than the iran story, bigger than any other story i have heard this week. it's deeply troubling, and it raises two sets of questions. one is will the regime in its death throes resort to the use of chemical weapons. it's not the first time we've seen that in the middle east. saddam used it, nasr used it. the u.s. laid down a red line. it said do not move those chemical weapons agents, certainly do not use them, and having drawn that red line, if assad starts to move in that direction, well, what are we going to do? are we going to intervene militarily? we've sort of put the u.s. credibility on the line here by
drawing a red line and if they violate that red line, what exactly are we going to do? that remains unclear to me. >> and i don't suggest for a moment you're going to have the exact answer to this but i got to ask it with your background. what kind of a troop level force would we need? what kind of troops would we need given the fact that a lot of these installations could be amongst people and we could be finding ourselves right back smack in the middle of the same thing that we faced in iraq? >> exactly. this is the set of bad choices that u.s. military planners face now. a lot of it actually depends on what the objective is. if your objective is to destroy the chemical munitions perhaps you could go in and bomb them or otherwise sabotage them. if your goal is to secure them and remove them so that they don't fall into the hands of others and that requires boots on the ground, then that's going to require all sorts of logistical planning and a pretty major effort. in part because, remember, military planners have to plan for the worst case.
even if you send a small group of people in, they have to have backup and a way out. there's all sorts of things that have to be planned for, and so as you plan for those contingencies, the number of troops required increases and increases. i think that's a really nasty problem for u.s. military planners, to go and somehow destroy or otherwise remove chemical weapons in the middle of a civil war against a country that has a military that is going to fight back. >> it's great -- >> not a happy thing. >> it's great i have you today because there's so much news that's happening in this region. here is yet another front, hand that is to the north of syria, turkey. there has been a lot of consecration along that border and at this point nato is expected to make some moves to approve patriot missile batteries along that border. what do you know about what's going to hahn and the implication? >> we don't know what's going to happen and a lot of this depends on how syria and others react in the region. it's important to remember that we have a treaty alliance with turkey. they are a member of nato.
it's not just europe and canada, but turkey is a long-standing member of nato. and turkey/syrian relationings have gone down over time. you can imagine a situation where the assad government picks a fight to widen the conflict. i don't know why they would do that but maybe they've come up with a theory that gives them a better shot at survival. maybe there's an intervention that freezes the regime in its current state. but dying regime with their back against the wall, those are unpredictable and dangerous regimes. i think all options are possible. i don't mean options on the table, but i mean there are a lot of different scene ae aeros could go baedly. it's more dangerous than the iranian situation right now.
>> not good to hear. jim walsh, thank you for touching on all three of those top news stories for us. appreciate your insight this afternoon. we should add to the story as well that nato secretary-general says that the defensive missiles could be in place on the turk yishg syrian border in just weeks. in the meantime, the news out of syria from the opposition, 123 more people have been killed across syria so far just today. we're only midday. apparently 30 of them children in a refugee camp. americans are always ready to work hard for a better future.
since ameriprise financial was founded back in 1894, they've been committed to putting clients first. helping generations through tough times. good times. never taking a bailout. there when you need them. helping millions of americans over the centuries. the strength of a global financial leader. the heart of a one-to-one relationship. together for your future. ♪ anne's tablet called my phone. anne's tablet was chatting with a tablet in sydney... a desktop in zurich... and a telepresence room in brazil. the secure cloud helped us get some numbers from my assistant's pc in new york. and before i reached the top, the board meeting became a congrats we sold the company party. wait til my wife's phone hears about this.
[ cellphone vibrating ] [ female announcer ] with cisco at the center, working together has never worked so well. but don't just listen to me. listen to these happy progressive customers. i plugged in snapshot, and 30 days later, i was saving big on car insurance. with snapshot, i knew what i could save before i switched to progressive. the better i drive, the more i save. i wish our company had something this cool. you're not filming this, are you? aw! camera shy. snapshot from progressive. test-drive snapshot before you switch. visit progressive.com today. but they haven't experienced extra strength bayer advanced aspirin. in fact, in a recent survey, 95% of people who tried it agreed that it relieved their headache fast. visit fastreliefchallenge.com today for a special trial offer. your soups are so awesomely delicious my husband and i can't stop eating 'em! what's...that... on your head?
can curlers! tomato basil, potato with bacon... we've got a lot of empty cans. [ male announcer ] progresso. you gotta taste this soup. with odor free aspercreme. powerful medicine relieves pain fast, with no odor. so all you notice is relief. aspercreme. now to washington where all they want for christmas is a deal to avoid the cliff. last week it was the democrats who came forward with a proposal, but it was a nonstarter for the republicans. too many tax increases. now the republicans have sent over a deal and still no meeting of the minds. you guessed it, not enough tax increases. here we go again. the deal does offer up $600
billion in save frtion medicare reform and other spending cuts and it also suggests raising $800 billion in revenue through tax reform instead of increases, but it just will not budge on raising those taxes on the wealthiest 2% of americans. and that is why democrats aren't budging. >> we're glad to finally see republicans joining in the negotiating process instead of watching from the sidelines, but while their proposal may be serious, it's also a nonstarter. they know any agreement that raises taxes on the middle class to protect unnecessary giveaways to the top 2% is doomed from the start. it won't pass. democrats won't agree to it, president obama wouldn't sign such a bill, and the american people won't support it. >> so let's bring in dan lothian because he's at the white house where the president is just about now meeting with a group of state governors. we'll get to that in a moment. first, is there anything else in
the republicans' proposal that's getting under the skin of the democrats? >> reporter: well, you know, there are obviously a lot of things in that proposal that democrats aren't necessarily embracing, but it really boils down to the, you know, tax breaks for upper income americans. i know we're starting to sound like a broken record here, but this is something that the president has been talking about even out on the campaign trail and the white house believes that, you know, the president was re-elected on that message, so the majority of americans agreed with him, and so this is really a nonstarter for democrats and for the president. they believe that the only way to really pull in revenue here is to go after wealthy americans, majority of americans won't be impacted. he wants those bush era tax cuts extended for middle class americans but believes that those upper income americans need to pay more. republicans though are resisting because they believe that what you're doing here is penalizing the very people who are the job creators, the ones who are sitting on the sidelines and won't invest, and if they have
their taxes go up, they'll be impacted, won't be able to put more money into the economy, won't be able to help turn the economy around. so that really is sort of the big sticking point. the white house refusing to budge from it at this point. we'll see where it goes in the next coming days. >> topic two, that is that the president is meeting with the leaders of the national governors association. i have the lineup here. a lot of people haven't heard of some of those folks. jack markell, dayton, beebe, gary her bet of utah, mary fallin of oklahoma and wisconsin's goff scott walker who i think a lot of people are familiar with. the question is why are they there, what do they want and why
wh -- what do they want to say? >> a lot of reasons. the president wants to make his case to them, and then in turn hopefully that they will go up on capitol hill. of course, some of them will be meeting with house speaker john boehner and senate majority leader harry reid. so the hope is they will put pressure on their lawmakers from their states to get a deal done. but also this is a chance for these governors to talk about the fact that what happens here with this fiscal cliff will have some real consequences, that we're not just talking about sort of these ambiguous numbers but it will impact them and why does it impact them? because according to a pew report, a third of the revenue of states comes from federal grants, and so states -- >> hey, dan, you're not going to believe this. just as you're speaking live, i'm only going to interrupt you for the governors themselves. let's listen in. >> governor beebe of arkansas, we are three democrats and three republicans. we just had what i would say was a very good meeting with the president.
we came in part to make sure that the voices and the issues that we face as governors in the states are heard and are considered as part of the discussions going on here in washington. the president was very open to that, said that we would continue to have a seat at the table. we talked about some of the issues that we often focus on as governors. one of those being opportunities for flexibility in terms of some of the programs that we partner with with the federal government. he was very open to that as well. also recognizing, i believe it was governor walker who brought up there's an impact here not just on the fiscal issues but also on the issues in terms of how the discussions here will actually impact the economies back home as well. and the president picked up on that and said he would be interested with our ideas also with respect to the pro-growth ideas. the vice president will be the point person for us going forward but very much an
invitation for us to stay involved, and i believe that as i said, as three democrats and three republicans, we all agreed we were going to come here today to focus on what we have in common, which frankly is a lot, and i think we all recognize that there's an impact on our states certainly by what happens here and we just want to make sure we as a national governors association and individual democrats and republicans, we are working together. so with that i will turn it over to governor fallin and then be happy to take questions from you. >> thank you. i'm mary fallin from oklahoma. we are very grateful for the opportunity to come and visit with the president on behalf of the national governors association and personal appreciate the vice president and his time, secretary geithner's briefing upon the economy and some of the discussions going on here at capitol hill. this is a very serious time for our nation, a very serious time for our individual states, especially as we are recovering from the 2008 economic downturn that our nation took and
certainly the impact that it had upon our states. we know that there are still many states in our states that are budgeting shortfalls. there are some states that have experienced growth in their economies and are recovering, and we're still dealing with states that have lower unemployment rates and some have higher unemployment rates. so we want to be a part of the solution to the problems facing our nation to be able to offer some of the innovative ways we have been able to address some of the concerns that have faced our own state budgets around certainly we understand that the discussions being held about federal cuts, whether it's taxes or tax reform, whether it is spending here on capitol hill or the sequestration, that that will have a huge impact on our state budgets. we are preparing our budgets which most of us will introduce january and february, and so we
have decisions we have to make, and so we are hoping that as not only the president but as the u.s. congress, the house and the senate, finalize and hopefully will be able to come to conclusion at the end of this month that we will be included to give our advice, our opinion upon the effects upon public policy and how it will affect our budgets. we also have some ideas on how we can save money, how we can be able to create more efficiencies in government and spending with some of the different demonstrations that we've done in our various states and we plan on getting back to the president, the vice president, with some of our suggestions and ideas. we appreciate their time today. >> so with that why don't we take questions. i think what you will see, we're not sort of saying -- >> some very critical comments that you just heard from this bipartisan committee of six representing the governors associati association, suggesting that the federal cuts in the sequestration could have a
remarkable affect on state budgets which, of course, they're all working on right now. i want to bring back dan lothian live at the white house. that is exactly what i was expecting to hear right off the top. look, when you talk about spending cuts, we depend on a lot of federal money in order to operate out here in these states. that's got to be a huge concern for these governors, dan. >> reporter: that's right. and the timing of that was perfect because that's where i was headed. you know, you look at a state like virginia where they have a lot of defense contractors, and according to that pew study they would be impacted, could see their economic activity fall by $10 billion, as many as 120,000 jobs lost, even a small state like south dakota, for example, which gets 10% of its revenue from federal grants. they would be impacted as well. you could see education impacted, for example, in south dakota. so these governors are very concerned about what these numbers could mean for them if lawmakers here in washington do not get a deal done.
it's very real. you could see everything from defense to education impacted if a deal isn't done. >> all right, dan lothian, thank you. i like that governor fallin mentioned they have ideas to save money and create efficiencies. perhaps it's the governors to the rescue in this fiscal cliff crisis.lothian, thanks so much that. ose. citracal slow release. now's a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs? and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses.
the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs every year. call today to request a free decision guide. the rescue in this fiscal cliff you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. if you're thinking about your options, call today. when you call, request your free decision guide. and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that may be right for you.
so this next story will leave you either shocked that politics are done this way or really not the least bit surprised. it involves former cia director david petraeus who has certainly had his share of trouble it's lately, but also the chairman of fox news channel roger ailes. there is no question that petraeus was a hero of the afghan war, so it may not come as any surprise that according to "the washington post" he was approached to run for president. but it's how he was approached and who approached him that may have crossed a line. a fox news analyst named kathleen mcfarland was on a trip to afghanistan when a proposal she made to the general was caught on tape.
she told general petraeus that fox news chief roger ailes would do whatever he could to get petraeus elected. she even started out by asking a very strange question coming from a news organization. >> he loves you and everybody at fox loves you. so what i'm supposed to directly from him to you, through me, is, first of all, is there anything fox is doing, right or wrong, that you want to tell us to do differently? >> is there anything you want to tell us to do differently? this is a surrogate for a national news organization asking a potential presidential candidate and someone who is in the middle of prosecuting a war if the news organization can do something differently. that person goes on to ask if general petraeus would consider the run for president, and then suggests that the chief of news corporation, rupert murdoch, and don't forget news corporation owns fox news, that that chief of news corporation would
bankroll his run for president. howard kurtz joins me live now from washington via skype. he's the anchor of "reliable sources" on cnn. this is pretty overwhelming stuff, i have to say. to just read it, my first inclination was to say, come on, that can't be true. what was your first reaction? >> there goes roger again because i reported last year ashleigh that roger ailes had dinner with most of the prospective presidential candidates including mitt romney and he gave him some advice about loosening up on the air. so even though he runs a major news channel, roger ailes was a backbattleground in republican politics, he can't resist dabbling in the political game. >> but to suggest a news organization might need some guidance on how to tailor what they're going on the air? >> i don't know if mcfarland was carrying a message from ailes or not.
petraeus interestingly enough said fox seemed to turn against the war in afghanistan after it became obama's war, in other words when it was no longary war being prosecuted by george w. bush. more interesting to me is the noths that ailes supposedly according to mcfarland on this tape trying to entice petraeus into the presidential race saying, you should quit unless obama offers you to be the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. you should quit. you should run. i might leave fox and run your campaign. i don't think he would actually do that, but the idea that rupert murdoch might bankroll a petraeus candidacy not that farfetched when you consider murdoch has given on a couple occasion seven-figure sums to the republican party. >> and howie, in the interest of complete fairness, "the washington post" reached out to roger ailes for his response to that, and i want to read for you what he told "the washington post" according to the paper. he says this, i am going to read his words. it was more of a joke, he says a wiseass way i have. i thought the republican field in the primaries needed to be
shaken up and that petraeus might be a good candidate. sounds like she, meaning k.t. mcfarland, thought she was on a secret mission in the reagan administration. she was way out of line. it's someone's fantasy to make me a kingmaker. it is not my job. but it is your job to talk about it, howie kurtz, and i assume on "relabel sources" this will be one of your topics. >> yeah. that was a nondenial denial. that will be one of our topics inde indeed. >> thanks so much. appreciate it. ...i propose savings for everyone! i'm talking hundreds here... and furthermore.. newscaster:breaking news. the gecko is demanding free pudding. and political parties that are actual parties!? with cake! and presents! ah, that was good. too bad nobody could hear me. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.
i have a cold... i took dayquil, but i still have a runny nose. [ male announcer ] truth is, dayquil doesn't work on runny noses. what? [ male announcer ] it doesn't have an antihistamine. really? [ male announcer ] really. alka-seltzer plus cold and cough fights your worst cold symptoms, plus has a fast acting antihistamine to relieve your runny nose. [ sighs ] thank you! [ male announcer ] you're welcome. that's the cold truth! [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus. ♪ oh what a relief it is! ♪ [ male announcer ] to learn more about the cold truth and save $1 visit alka-seltzer on facebook.
the white house. you might remember it wasn't so long ago, like last week, that just as quickly the speaker himself rejected the democrats deal. >> you don't have to really be a rocket scientist to understand that the rich do have to pay more, taxes do have to be raised on the rich. i think that's why over 60% of the public in these polls are not only supportive of a tax increase on the rich but also will blame the republicans if we go over the fiscal cliff, and this gives, frankly, this gives the white house and this gives the obama administration much more bargaining leverage. >> well, the former treasury secretary has one thing to say but many other voices are a virtual kcacophony where wolf blitzer has to sit every day. >> in the short term the president has more leverage right now because if they do nothing, let's say they avoid
any legislation between now and the end of the year, starting january 1st we go over that so-called fiscal cliff, tax rates go up not just for the rich but for the middle class, for everyone, all those cuts in domestic spending and naths security spending, they go into effect. people aren't going to be happy about that, and the president will be able to say, look, i begged them, i repeatedly said 98% of the american public, they wouldn't get a tax increase if we just took them out of the equation, let's pass legislation extending the bush tax cuts for everyone earning under $250,000 a year. they didn't do it. so, you know, he'll have some leverage on that in terms of the politics because politically, you know, the polls all are very consistent. the election results are pretty consistent. the american public is ready for a modest increase in taxes for the upper 2% of taxpayers. having said that, there's another issue that's coming up in february or march and that's raising the debt ceiling once again. the republicans have a lot of leverage on that right now
because the white house, the administration will desperately want to raise that debt ceiling so the u.s. doesn't go into default. that could undermine u.s. creditworthiness, u.s. interest rates, all that kind of stuff, and the republicans will have some serious leverage there down the road. both sides have leverage. my bottom line in the short run, the democrats have some more. >> so it sounds and before we even get to that very valuable piece of leverage, the debt ceiling discussions, it's odd that it would seem as though the democrats would benefit from heading over the fiscal cliff because then it's the marketing message of who was to blame for it. all the while though, wolf, there are all those calamitous cuts that would go into effect, and that could hurt the democrats terribly, no? >> it potentially could hurt in this regard. where is the president's leadership? why couldn't he put a deal together the way ronald reagan worked with tip o'neill back in the '80s? presidential leadership, he's
just fresh off of an impressive re-election win, and so the argument will be he's not a leader, he couldn't put together the coalition that would avoid going over the fiscal cliff. so that's certainly something that the republicans have as leverage on the president right now. having said that though, remember, back in the '90s when the government shut down eyeball to eyeball negotiations were going on between bill clinton and then speaker newt gingrich and the government did shut down. the president emerged on both occasions, two shutdowns, in a stronger political position because the american public blamed the conservatives, the republicans in congress more than they blamed the white house. so that is the one area where the white house is saying, look, they have some leverage on that. >> let me ask you this, wolf. you have been at this game a long time. this intractability sounds and feel it's like nothing we have ever seen before. do you have any sort of, i don't know, light on the horizon that you see? are we going to be this polarized and literally make the
country pay for what's now become just sheer ugly politics? >> my own gut tells me that between now and the end of the year they will reach a deal. and it will be a compromise and both sides won't be thrilled by it, but it will be better than the alternative. and it will probably go down to the last minute. it usually does. maybe ruin some christmas vacations and stuff like that, but the stakes really are enormous right now. if you take a look. the two key issues the republicans are going to have to bite the bullet on more tax revenue and maybe raising that upper income rate a little bit. the democrats are going to have to find entitlement cuts, medicare, medicaid cuts that they really hate and the liberal base will vote against the conservative base will vote against some tax increases. but the moderates will get maybe 218 votes in the house of representatives. that will be enough to pass the legislation. i think they have the votes in the senate. there are a lot of moderates democrats and republicans who can forge a coalition in the
senate. so my sense is they'll probably get close to a deal. they'll probably get a deal, but it will be touch and go and it will look like they're going to go over the cliff, but they probably won't. >> i bet it looks a whole lot like the three plans we have already tried to hammer out and all this while it's cost us everything in the uncertainty which has been such -- i'll just use a term -- a bummer. >> a year and a half ago boehner and the president, they were pretty close to a deal. they thought they had a deal -- >> and they will probably end up at the same exact plan. >> i suspect you're right. >> grand plan, grand bargain. thank you, sir. you can tune into wolf's program. begins at 4:00 p.m. eastern every day. military life is different. we've been there. that's why every bit of financial advice we offer is geared specifically to current and former military members and their families. [ laughs ]
dad! dad! [ applause ] ♪ [ male announcer ] life brings obstacles. every day. call or visit us online. we're ready to help. ♪ you make me happy when skies are gray ♪ [ female announcer ] you know exactly what it takes to make them feel better. ♪ you make me happy [ female announcer ] that's why you choose children's tylenol. the same brand your mom trusted for you when you were young. ♪ how much i love you [ humming ] [ female announcer ] children's tylenol, the #1 brand of pain and fever relief recommended by pediatricians and used by moms decade after decade. [ humming ] and with my bankamericard cash rewards credit card, i love 'em even more. i earn 1% cash back everywhere, every time. 2% on groceries. 3% on gas. automatically. no hoops to jump through. that's 1% back on... [ toy robot sounds ] 2% on pumpkin pie. and apple.
since last wednesday which means there's been no time to recover each time these places get hit, and flooding damage, well, just look at your screen, it's an absolute mess. we have crews covering every angle of this storm. dan simon is in lafayette, california, which is in the northeast part of oakland. there's a massive sinkhole there. chad myers is in the cnn weather center watching these storms as they develop. dan, let me start with you. what's the story on the sinkhole? >> reporter: well, as you said, ashleigh, it is a real mess out here. let me show you what's going on. you can see crews here removing some of the debris. this is a massive sinkhole. this is 80 feet long, 15 feet deep, 40 feet wide. let me explain how this happened. there's a creek that runs beneath the concrete, and it got clogged up and it just washed away all the dirt, and with that the road. you got the whole street closed. it's going to be closed for several months. what crews had to do, they
actually had to set up a temporary sewer line. you can see it right here because when the street gave way, it actually ruptured the line. this is the temporary line, also a temporary water line. lafayette where we are, it's about 20 miles east of san francisco, and the whole bay area has been impacted by a series of storms. the storm that's coming tonight, this will be the fourth storm in about a week, and we've seen, you know, downed power lines and trees and that kind of thing. at one point 340,000 people were without power, so with the storm coming tonight, this is the last thing this community needs. ashleigh? >> my lord. dan, it's a good thing no one ended up in that as they were driving. so i guess that's the light at the end of that tunnel. dan simon, thank you. chad, i want you to jump in here. i was reading through some of your information, chad. coy not believe it when i saw some of these location where is dan is and other people on the
withest coast got one year's worth of rain in just a few days. >> in seven days. even mt. shasta, a pretty wet place, picked up 25 inches of rainfall in three separate storms. you add them all up. now all of a sudden that's like nine months' of rain in one location and other sports we know picked up almost a year's worth of rain in one week. now it's running off. there is rain coming back in san francisco. it's raining farther to the north and it's up into washington and oregon. but the rain for the bay area only a couple hours away. raining here in portland, seattle. you would expect that but here is the next event that would affect the bay area here in the coming hours. it's raining up the i-5, raining just about into napa and also into sow mona b-- sonoma. there is good news for northern california. the storm will taper off for you. not good news for washington,
oregon, and british columbia. the storms are going to be sliding up farther to the north and four more storms are on the way for this area in the next 16 days. i know people love to go skiing up there, but just to give you so perspective, whistler has picked up 133 inches of snow on top of their mountain. that will be their watter er to drink in the um ser. i'm going to whistler over christmas. >> chad myers, thank you. also thanks to dan simon for bringing that you say story. for only $45 a month per phone. would we get the same coverage? same coverage on america's best networks. you saved $146.76 by switching to straight talk. awesome! now you can afford to share your allowance with me. get the season's hottest smartphones like the samsung galaxy s2 and get straight talk with unlimited data for just $45 a month --
from america's gift headquarters. walmart. ♪ if you're a man with low testosterone, you should know that axiron is here. the only underarm treatment for low t. that's right, the one you apply to the underarm. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18. axiron can transfer to others through direct contact. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant, and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur. report these signs and symptoms to your doctor if they occur. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. do not use if you have prostate or breast cancer. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet, or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa.
believe it or not. in the oceans and the waters off the coast of california. those big carriers can't dock. they can't unload because there's a labor strike going on at the ports of los angeles and long beach and that strike has been going on eight days. joining us is miguel marquez. this thing is costing the u.s. economy about $1 billion. is wr? >> reporter: well, what's wrong the clerical union, folks striking there behind me, blocked several terminals here at ports of los angeles and long beach. it is a massive operation here nearly ahalf trillion in goods come through every year, it's huge. 40 ship affected. several and berthed here. several turned away. others awaiting in the ocean. we understand there is a press conference with the mayor, dramatic negotiations finally
going on on this. they hadn't been talking for some type. mayor villaraigosa coming in from overseas trip last night, 10:30, 11:00 pacific time, went straight to negotiations not far from here. he's been there all night long on their backs and he's doing a press conference in 25 minutes or so. that probably means there is a deal at hand. >> a billion dollars a day, i hope they're bringing out all of the stops at this point. if you're out there, check one of those carriers and see if perhaps my ninjago is there for my kid. it's going to drive me crazy. >> reporter: yes. this is all of your christmas gifts on that ship. i can see it, they're waiting for you to be unwrapped and out of there. >> that is cruel. >> reporter: you've been a good girl this year, who knew? >> listen, i need to be rewarded, just getting those darn things. i know you're getting messages. let us know if you hear of breaks in this thing.
it's quite serious. miguel marquez. there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet,
or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel. log on now to androgeloffer.com and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news.
the federal judge in california is issuing a controversial ruling that could send gay kids into the offices of therapists whose work experts have declared as dangerous. that statement made headlines back in october when it banned something called conversion or reparative therapy. it's controversial practice aimed at reversing homosexuality in minors. the american psychiatric association has been very clear on what it thinks of that kind of treatment, calls it dangerous, and i'll go on to quote in the last four decades reparative therapists have not produced rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. and the potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety, and self-destructive behavior. end quote.
defense attorney joey jackson is live in atlanta to explain why a judge would do this. joey, explain, why would a judge do this? >> explain away. first of all we have to understand this is an injunction. what is an injunction mean? it means we're going to slow down and there's going to be a hearing but pending that hearing the law will not go into effect. now get this, ashleigh, with regard to the law not going into effect, it won't go into effect for the three plaintiffs. everyone else, of course, will not be subject to this ruling because the judge limited that ruling to these three. so in essence, the judge said, right now, when you have an injunction it means there's a likelihood of success on the merits to those who sued, we'll have a full-blown hearing later but we're going to allow the plaintiffs to come to court and explain. >> you used that word that's so critical, merit. here's where i lost the plot. apparently this justice suggesting that these therapists, the three of them, who brought this suit, their
free speech is somehow at risk if they can't treat these minors. where on earth does free speech collide with the health of kids? you can't yell fire in a theater. >> very well-stated. what happens is, whenever you look at anything, first of all, it's creative lawyering but what they're talking about, that is the plaintiffs, they're saying, listen, what you're doing, incidentally, is that you're affecting my conduct and you're affecting my ability to speak with my patients. you're limiting what i could say and what i can't say. if i say the doctors or the psychiatrists think it's appropriate to speak to them about reparative therapy, that is my first amendment right to do so, you by doing this, you're infringing upon that thereforeu. that's what they say. who knows what a judge will say. >> my lord i could go on and on with the different cures out there that just aren't allow but i can't because the show's over. >> go on. >> i adore you. you're the best.
we'll talk more about this, this isn't over. joey jackson, thank you. check out cnn.com for more because we've got a lot of excellent articles online about conversion therapy and the controversies that surround it, as well as now the legal case that surrounds it. thank you for watching everyone. i'll be back in an hour. "newsroom international" with michael holmes is coming your way after the break. ♪ ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] everyone deserves the gift of all day pain relief. this season, discover aleve. all day pain relief with just two pills.